FATHIMA COLLEGE OF PHARMACY Vs. ADMISSION AND FEE REGULATORY COMMITTEE FOR MEDICAL EDUCATION IN KERALA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The controversy in this case revolves round a particular student, who was admitted to the course leading to a Diploma in Pharmacy in the petitioner college and the challenge herein is against the order of the Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee for Medical Education in Kerala (hereinafter referred to as Committee for short) constituted under the provisions of the Kerala Professional Colleges or Institution (Prohibition of Capitation Fee, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non-Exploitative Fee and other Measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence in Professional Education) Act, 2006 Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

(2.) The facts pleaded in this case would show that the student in question was admitted to the said course by the petitioner under the category of "mandatory reservation". To understand the meaning of this reservation one will have to refer to Ext.P2 prospectus published by the Government of Kerala. The categories of reservation mentioned in Ext.P2 are "Reservation for Persons with Disabilities (PD)" and "Mandatory Reservation" for socially and educationally backward classes, for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe communities and Other Eligible Communities (OEC) against unavailed seats of SC/ST candidates. As we have already said above, the student involved herein was admitted under Mandatory Reservation, meaning that she was allotted a seat that was earmarked for communal reservation for the Socially and educationally backward classes. It appears that after the student was so admitted, the teachers of the college noticed that she was not having any communicative skills and that she was not responsive in the class or attentive to the instructions given by the teachers. The teachers, therefore, appear to have taken up the issue with the parents of the student and that on their assurance that the student would improve, they allowed her to continue to attend classes. However, since the attention span of the student or her concentration in studies did not improve, it transpires that the petitioner College was constrained to issue Transfer Certificate to the student finding her not to be fit or in a position to continue or complete the course.

(3.) The petitioner college says that, in fact, before the Transfer Certificate was issued, the student was subjected to examination by a competent Medical Board, which found her to be mentally retarded to an extent of about 50%. The College says that in such circumstances, it was only possible for them to remove her from the course because she would be completely unsuitable to the post of a Pharmacist on account of her severe mental retardation.